>>202
I think the assertion that protection is equivalent to ownership is quite retarded, which is why I was hoping for something more elaborate. I guess bodyguards own the president, huh?
The government, in this case, does not ideologically equate to mere "bodyguards". If you didn't understand something as obvious as that, it comes as no surprise that you find the view point to be "retarded". You just simply don't understand it on any level. That's not my fault and I shouldn't have to elaborate when you're more concerned with reducing concrete statements into alpha-numeric vomit due to cognitive dissonance.
the severity or the feelings that warn against sex if you don't want to have a baby.
These "feelings that warn against sex" don't exist in any different or varying forms from men to women. All have ability to reason that sex equals baby and therefore there can be no one side that has more responsibility as the other.
You can't even argue the analogy, so you: a) Insult it and b) Rearrange it so you wouldn't have to address what it actually asserted. The CW can't build anything without the go ahead of the Geologist unless you're trying to talk about rape, which is not what I'm doing. I also notice that you contradict your 'men are the root of all problems' diatribe by not even taking into account that the woman might have something to say (the fact that you think she doesn't mean that you think she's stupid). Of course you don't think it's contradicting since you stated it in the form of double-standard.
Your ability to process what I'm saying is very limited, because (as Xel pointed out) your intellect is very rigid.
Allow me to express it simply.
Semen + Egg = Baby.
Man has semen.
Woman has egg and womb.
The womb is a part of the woman's body, just like the penis is apart of the man's body. You tend to stray from this implication because your argument requires that we treat the fetus as anything but what it actually is- the extention of a man and a woman's genetic material.
You continually say that the baby is the responsibility of both sides of the equation, but at the same time, you make the female out to be some kind of victim who's inherently ignorant of her own physiology. As a result, more than simply blame, but also financial and social responsibilities are put on the man when he didn't even want it in the first place.
The only one who's had an opinion on the physiology of the female at this point, has been you. What you're doing is called projecting. And if the man didn't want the child in the first place, he shouldn't have sprayed his seed inside the woman. Stop acting like men aren't reasonable and can only think with their dicks. That is simply not the case.
Neither is simply saying, "No proof will convince you," in response to me telling you to pull up citations for your contention that fetuses don't qualify as living sentience.
Semantics. My source material isn't any different from the material that's been provided by Xel and other Anons. If their "citations" didn't convince you, then neither will mine.
Secondly, I never said these things were proof. I said that they were emperically evident.
Not to mention that whenever I do ask for you to back yourself up, you say, "It's useless trying to convince you."
See the above statement. Empirical evidence requires proof. Also: Does this mean the proof that I seek, you don't have? I'mean, cut the bullshit, either you have it or you don't. You can easily google the brain development of a fetus if you want. Like, I said, my proof isn't any different from what's already been said in previous posts. With that in mind, why didn't you bother to refute the things Xel, Kumori and other Anons have said in relation to the development of a sentient fetus?
.....You're kidding right?
No. I am not.
because the most you've done so far is splooge out vitriolic insults, hearsay, sweeping denunciation, and the word "fail."
Aw. :(
LOL. Welcome to 4chan. I'm not prone to uttering "fail" unless it's warranted, which, it has been everytime I've refered to you or your arguments as failures. PROTIP: Stop failing to win.